>>38845>it depends on what software you are using.
Not any currently to be honest. I'm running my web server for hosting my
website and that's essentially it.
I used a static site generator (https://www.romanzolotarev.com/ssg.html
) to convert Markdown files from a small wiki I had hosted on GitHub to html, but
that didn't work too well and I had to fix a bunch of stuff, so I won't use that one anymore.
>I see static site
generators being used
That's what I want to start using at one point, I just have to get into it. It seems like the best solution for
a static website, Just need to find one I like.
>Scripting languages often used in web development are also an
Things like PHP seem a bit overkill for me. I see the use you have for it, and your workflow is nicely adapted to it, but I
don't think it would make sense for me.
>and then later I automated writing the HTML itself to an extent
I saw you having a post about that, wanted to read through it at one point. It seemed interesting. Maybe it will give me some
>on the big assumption you haven't already.
yeah... I don't yet lol. That's a big part of why
I asked about the workflow you guys had. Static site generators seem to be able to do that; the one I used, ssg, just had you put 2 files in your
directory and the content of those would be pre-/appended to the other files that are supposed to be converted.
The downside is you have to
generate everything again after changing a header, but I guess to me that's better than using php only to include those dynamically.
me think, maybe entr could be used to look for changes in these 2 files ssg uses to automatically generate new versions of files and put them in
the right place...
>I like Vim because I like bulk actions and macros.
You have good taste. I can't work
I'm just looking for a web development workflow, the rest I'm more than familiar with. I just haven't dabbled with
Thanks for the suggestions, it jumpstarted my brain. Now to not be lazy and implement the stuff...>>38867
can't relate to the content at all, but as >>38870
said, the site has a nice nostalgic?
vibe to it.